Rivera v. United States Of America

Rivera v. United States Of America

Plaintiff:	Jasper Rivera
Defendant:	United States Of America
Case Number:	3:2012cv01339
Filed:	July 11, 2012
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Office:	Scranton Office
County:	Union
Presiding Judge:	Martin C. Carlson
Presiding Judge:	Edwin M. Kosik
Nature of Suit:	Civil Rights
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1331
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
October 2, 2013	Filing 76 ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry); ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1) The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson dated 4/12/13 69 is adopted in part and denied in part 2) The Defendants& #039; motion for summary judgment 16 is granted in part and denied in part 3) Defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted as to plaintiff's claims that prison officials negligently placed plaintiff ans assailant in the same recreat ion cage and failed to timely intervene after the assault began 4) Defendant's motion for summary judgment is denied as to plaintiff's remaining claim 5) Plaintiff's motion for sanction 49 is denied and 6) A pretrial conference in this case shall be set forthwith. Signed by Honorable Edwin M. Kosik on 12/2/13. (ts)
April 30, 2013	Filing 58 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER - Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, the plaintiffs motion to strike (Doc. 47.), is DENIED and motion is instead deemed as a sur-reply brief on the pending summary judgment motion. Signed by Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson on April 30, 2013. (kjn)

Date Filed

Document Text

October 2, 2013

Filing 76 ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry); ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1) The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson dated 4/12/13 69 is adopted in part and denied in part 2) The Defendants& #039; motion for summary judgment 16 is granted in part and denied in part 3) Defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted as to plaintiff's claims that prison officials negligently placed plaintiff ans assailant in the same recreat ion cage and failed to timely intervene after the assault began 4) Defendant's motion for summary judgment is denied as to plaintiff's remaining claim 5) Plaintiff's motion for sanction 49 is denied and 6) A pretrial conference in this case shall be set forthwith. Signed by Honorable Edwin M. Kosik on 12/2/13. (ts)

April 30, 2013

Filing 58 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER - Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, the plaintiffs motion to strike (Doc. 47.), is DENIED and motion is instead deemed as a sur-reply brief on the pending summary judgment motion. Signed by Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson on April 30, 2013. (kjn)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Pennsylvania Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Rivera v. United States Of America
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: United States Of America
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jasper Rivera
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?